Table 1

Gender Profile of the Respondents

n=

Gender Frequency Percent (%)

Male 6
Female 14
Total 20

Table 2
Age Profile of the Respondents
n=

Age Frequency Percent (%)

15-18 11
19-22 7

23-26 2

27 and above 0

Total

Table 4
Year Level Profile of the Respondents
n=

Year Level Frequency Percent (%)

1st year
2nd year
3rd year
 4th year
5th year
Total

Table 5
Socio-Economic Status Profile of the Respondents
n=

Year Level Frequency Percent (%)

10 000 and below

10 001 - 15 000
15 001 - 20 000
21 000 and above
Total
 Table 6
Extent Of Student’s Perception On The Effectiveness Of The Student Government
Advantages wx Verbal Equivalent
Information Dissemination 3.50 Agree
1. Informs the students ahead of time of the activities and
3.55 Agree
projects to be implemented.
2. Uses social media or postings in disseminating
3.45 Agree
important announcements that concern students.
Catering Students’ Complains, Suggestions and
3.23 Undecided
Concerns
3. Is aware of the students’ complains and takes
3.20 Undecided
appropriate actions on it.
4. Consults students on any important issue that concerns
3.20 Undecided
them
5. Accepts suggestions from the students they represent
3.30 Undecided
in organizing activities.
Organization of Activities 3.62 Agree
6. Organizes activities to showcase the talents and
4.10 Agree
abilities of the students.
7. Organizes financial campaigns or sponsorship to help
3.65 Agree
in financing the activities organized in the university.
8. Acts as one team in facilitating activities. 3.65 Agree
9. Encourages the involvement of students in school
3.75 Agree
activities.
10. Organizes educational and recreational activities to
3.35 Undecided
unite students.
11. Accomplishes activities that satisfied students. 3.60 Agree
12. Organizes activities that are exciting and empowering. 3.30 Undecided
13. Facilitates the activities very well. 3.40 Undecided
14. Makes sure that students are having fun in the activities
3.80 Agree
they organize.
Relationship with Students, Staff and other
3.49 Agree
Organizations.
15. Coordinates with other organizations in the university Undecided
through any means. 3.40
16. Identifies problems encountered by students in the Undecided
school. 3.30
17. Communicates with students in any form. 3.65 Agree
18. Imposes good and respectful behavior among the
Agree
students and school staff. 3.50
19. Is respected by the students. 3.55 Agree
20. Is recognized by the students. 3.55 Agree
 Table 7
Relationship between the Students’ Perception on the Effectiveness
of the Student Government and their Profile in terms of Gender

Gender Wx Computed Tab x2 Decision/

x2 Remarks
Male 0.02 9.49 Failed to reject H0/
Female Not significant

Table 9
Relationship between the Students’ Perception on the Effectiveness
of the Student Government and their Profile in terms of
Age, Year Level, and Socio-Economic Status
Computed Decision/
Variables Tabular r
r Remarks
Student’s Perception on the
Effectiveness of the Student
Government And . . .
Reject Ho/
Age -0.447 0.444
Significant
0.444 Failed to reject Ho/
Year Level 0.120
Not significant
0.444 Failed to reject Ho/
Socio-Economic Status -0.410
Not significant
 Actual Table
Relationship between the Students’ Perception on the Effectiveness
of the Student Government and their Profile in terms of Gender, and College
Age, Year Level, and Socio-Economic Status
Computed Tabular Decision/
Variables
value value Remarks
Student’s Perception on the
Effectiveness of the Student
Government And . . .
Failed to Reject H0
Gender x2 =0.1010
(Not Significant)
r=0.1850
Reject H0
Age (negligible 0.1060
(Significant)
correlation)
r= - 0.2320
Reject H0
Year Level (slight 0.1060
(Significant)
correlation)
Failed to Reject H0
Socio-Economic Status r=0.0130 0.1060
(Not Significant)

The table above shows the relationship between the student’s perception on the

effectiveness of the student government and their profile in terms of gender, age, year

level, and socio-economic status. Considering the students’ profile, the computed values

for age, 0.1850, and for year level, -0.2320, are both greater than the tabular. This results

to the rejection of the null hypothesis, which means that there exist a significant

relationship between these variables. The computed r for age of the respondents shows

a negligible relationship, while the computed r for their year level shows a slight

relationship to their perceived effectiveness of the student government. This signifies that

the year level of the students affects their perception to student government. Since the

result (-0.2320) is negative, this implies that the higher the year level of the students the

lower is their perception on the effectiveness of the student government.